According to the food police, we’re all consuming way too much food and need to work on our portion control.
Apparently a steak or any piece of meat should never be larger than the palm of your hand.
Four squares? Who can resist eating more than that? I can happily munch my way through half a family-sized bar!
I remember once eating a 50oz sirloin. It was a challenge in a new restaurant and anybody who succeeded got their lunch free.
I polished it all off with ease.
When it comes to cheese, we should only ever have a portion that’s the same size as two thumbs.
How utterly dull and boring would life be if we stuck to these ridiculous portion sizes?
I would rather die a bit younger and at least enjoy my life instead of living to be 100 by eating tiny portions.
I’m the kind of person who will always require seconds of any meal.
I’m ashamed to say I don’t feel satisfied unless I feel full up.
If you were to come round to our house, you’d see that my piled-high Sunday roast plate normally resembles Mount Kilimanjaro!
Lou: According to dietitians, the maximum amount of chocolate you should eat in one go is equivalent to the length of your index finger – around four squares.
That doesn’t seem like very much to me.
Generally I’m a pretty healthy eater, but chocolate is the one thing I know I have too much of.
But four squares? Who can resist eating more than that? I can happily munch my way through half a family-sized bar!
It doesn’t get much better with cake. You’re only supposed to have a slice the width of two fingers.
And when it comes to dinner, half your plate should be made up of vegetables.
At least I can tick off this one.
As a vegetarian I probably eat more vegetables than most and I hate having a meal with no veg, as it seems totally wrong to me.
So I reckon that while my chocolate intake may be a bit (okay a lot) above the advised amount, I make up for it with lots of vegetables.
What do you mean it doesn’t work like that?